Second, I don’t give a damn. Also, are your parents really emptying their savings account for this educational experience?
Michael Arrington smacking around the AP Stylebook and the grammar police that emailed him a "correction." I find it really funny. I don't know why, but I do. Kind of wish this was a Youtube video of some sort....
Add $30 million, plus $35 million, plus $15 million, and what do you get? That would be $80 million. At least. Before these teams spin their turnstiles once.
OK, now let's head back to the payroll list. We count a minimum of a dozen teams, depending on how you define "total payroll," that aren't spending that same number -- $80 million -- on their major league payroll. So it isn't just Scott Boras who has the right to ask: What's up with that?
A different look at the economic issues that exist in Baseball.
Comments [0]
This is AWESOME! Screw the Urban Spoon iPhone app - this is the real deal on how to figure out what to eat!
Comments [0]
If his team had gotten the first down and the Patriots won, he would have gotten far less credit than he got blame for failing. This introduces what economists call a “principal-agent problem.” Even though going for it increases his team’s chance of winning, a coach who cares about his reputation will want to do the wrong thing. He will punt, just because he doesn’t want to be the goat. (I’ve seen the same thing in my research on penalty kicks in soccer; it looks like kicking it right down the middle is the best strategy, but it is so embarrassing when it fails that players don’t do it often enough.) What Belichick proved by going for it last night is that 1) he understands the data, and 2) he cares more about winning than anything else.
Great input from the Freakonomics blog...
Comments [0]
Comments [0]